Jump to content
Sports Interactive Community

Anonymous Coward

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Anonymous Coward

  • Rank
    Amateur
  1. It's interesting reading through the 'challenge' threads thinking about this stuff. I can't shake the impression that a lot of people are playing the game almost as follows: Play it straight up until a critical point (for example a playoff game, or a youth intake) Reload until the desired result is achieved. Now that I put it like that, I realise thats exactly how I've played the game in the past Its great hearing all your confessions/affirmations, I think it will help me knock it on the head
  2. I wonder if the FML experiment has left a bit of a negative after-effect on the game, or people's attitude to it? 'Gaming' FML was horribly easy, and actually seemed to be the object of the game, as it was so 'rank' obsessed. The Match engine had corner bugs and couldn't cope with flooding the midfield or playing three up front. Anyone playing a 4-4-2 or the like in the early match engines just got slaughtered outright. Equally, players tailored to exploit these holes in the ME were available much cheaper than the supposedly 'world class' players, so the game polarised rapidly between those people playing the game 'at face value' and those doing what was required to win. With this mentality of 'win at all costs' established, it was inevitable that people would move onto 'harder' stuff, and it became increasingly obvious that the gameworlds were rife with cartels, inflating prices and fixing competitions. Multiple accounts were the thing which really broke the game beyond all fixing. It was obvious that some people ran multiple teams in the same gameworld from the very beginning, but the trial accounts enabled cheating on a scale which the mods just could not begin to cope with. In the advent of another multiplayer version of FM, I think serious thought would have to be given to tackling this.
  3. That's an interesting one. There are other 'features' in game which are perhaps bending, rather than breaking the rules. For example: Adjusting the wage budget downwards before opening negotiations often results in the player demanding a lower wage to start with. Setting an unrealistically high asking price on a player you don't want to sell - this pretty much always used to allow you to keep them indefinitely. I think the second of these has been mostly fixed now, not sure about the first though.
  4. What I think they mean by this is that they distinguish between what they know 'in game' and 'out of game' - for example, I might know a player is injury prone because he plays for my club in RL, but its a hidden attribute in the game. The way the rule is phrased in the LLM guidelines puts its more clearly than I did: Q: It’s impossible not to know about players in real-life from the media and such. How can we pretend not to know about them in the game? A: Role play. In the game your manager doesn’t know anything about the real world – all his information comes from the gameworld’s media. It’s perfectly acceptable for your manager to take an interest in a player mentioned by the in-game media. It will be a matter for your conscience if you decide to go for a player you know to be good in real-life that your scouts don’t like the look of (plus there is no guarantee that the player will actually be any good in the game). If you truly embrace the LLM way of playing, the choice will be easy It wouldn't be hard to write an autosave routine which 'offered' unsaved data - Ignoring the offer of unsaved progress would indicate a likelihood that somebody quit in order to reload.
  5. Editing the db is a perilous one, I find. I'm quite liking the fact that you have to install it as an action in steam, makes it a more conscious decision, with full awareness of the evil it could unleash :-) When I play as my local team, the temptation to 'correct' player positions and attributes in the DB tends to lead to an outbreak of kids with high random PA's in the U-19s...
  6. Wise words from both of you. (edit -all three of you!) I guess it is something you have to grow out of. I think for me, blogging about my game might stop me cold - It would be sublimely ludicrous to cheat in a game you were blogging about.
  7. I think we would all agree that ultimately 'beating' FM becomes a hollow victory if you 'cheat.' I would however, be really interested to hear how many of you play the game absolutely without 'cheating.' I've put the word itself into quotes, as it's such an emotive term, and I think in a game that you are playing against the computer, not involving other people there is no need to get majorly overwrought about it. In multiplayer games, it's a different story. Also, there are arguably some 'grey areas. There is a pretty massive gradient from a sneaky glance at PA in the database or on a website, the odd cheeky revert, all the way up to FMRTE/database 'enhancing', extra manager-adding antics. At the whitest extreme, those in the LLM community who believe in playing the game without 'outside knowledge' would hold that making use of anything your manager should not know (a lot of in-game info comes into this category) in order to make decisions is 'cheating', including using scouts/star ratings etc. From this perspective, any player recommendations, knowledge from other FM games or even from RL is forbidden. My own personal failing is contract negotiations - I can't stand the infernal agents breaking these off in such an arbitrary fashion, so I tend to save before negotiations, so I can reload and try again if I make a wrong move. I'm aware this gives me a big edge in an important aspect of the game, but I don't think I have a sufficient streak of masochism to play the game absolutely 'straight'. The catch to allowing yourself some 'cheating' of course, is that its a very slipperly slope. If you are in the habit of reverting in trivial circumstances, you will almost certainly do it almost without thinking when your star striker breaks his leg. I wonder if people be interested in the concept of 'enforcement' measures in future games - something which tallies 'suspiciously-timed' re-loads for example, which could then be viewed by other steam users? I would expect this to be quite a useful aid to willpower. What do you all think? Have other people struggled to quit using 'revert', or editing the db? Do you use shortlists of wonderkids? Do you even see that as 'cheating'?
×
×
  • Create New...